Back to Contents
 
  Download
 
  Measuring Up 2000 Earns National Attention
 
  Questions and Answers about Measuring Up 2000
 
  How We Grade
 
  Measuring Up 2000 is Released at the National Press Club
 
  Important Questions
 
  Addressing Student Learning
 
  How Does Measuring Up 2000 Measure Up?
 
  Focusing Public Attention
 
  Making the Grade
 
  Sobering Up in 2001
 
  A Gift for Our Nation
 
  A Good “First Draft”
 
  A Herculean Effort
 
  A Useful Tool
 
  A Fair Comparison
 
  Meaningful, Measurable Goals

National CrossTalk Fall 1999
News Editorial Other Voices Interview
 

Sobering Up in 2001

America’s complex system of higher education is not performing up to its claims

By David B. Laird, Jr.
David B. Laird, Jr. is president of the Minnesota Private College Council.

THE NATIONAL CENTER for Public Policy and Higher Education has offered the leadership of our nation and our states a great service in its new report, Measuring Up 2000. The report is timely, appropriate, stimulating, alarming, targeted, balanced and perhaps too polite.

The central point of the report is that the complex system of American higher education is not performing up to its claims, nor to the level of excellence that will be required to maintain a compet-itive place in a rapidly changing world economy, or to maintain a stable society at home. We must cease to be so self-protective in addressing this challenge.

In spite of its sobering and challenging messages, the report has received muted coverage in the media. In many nations of the world, such a report would result in a national uproar and the loss of face for political leadership. If we continue to ignore recent signals, including those in this report, we will do so at our own political, economic and social peril.

For a number of decades the United States has been comforted in the blind confidence that we have the finest higher education “system” in the world. Unless we truly believe that all of our institutions perform as well as Harvard, Stanford, Michigan and Berkeley, then we must ask whether we consciously resist working hard enough to make it so. The measures in Measuring Up 2000 strongly indicate that the patterns of higher education success vary greatly from state to state, probably from institution to institution, and that there is great resistance to assessing them.

Our competition worldwide is energized, organized and committed. The announcement last year that the United States now ranks behind Norway, Great Britain and the Netherlands in the production of undergraduate degrees per capita should be an alarm for those who do not believe that the United States has competition in higher education.

Measuring Up 2000 is an important wakeup call to the leadership of our states and nation. If we are to successfully compete in the future, we will need an honest national discussion and a realignment of state and federal priorities to make all of our institutions more competitive and aligned to economic and social needs.

The conclusion in this report that the bene-fits of higher education are “unevenly and often unfairly distributed” is at odds with the political rhetoric of the last 30 years. We must address the fact that we are mortgaging the future of our chil-dren through government, consumer and student debt that together will create its own future eco-nomic pressures.

While the individual benefits of a higher education are indeed both real and significant, we are requiring our young people to borrow more from their future income than any other generation in our history. Our resistance to financial planning for college, especially among the affluent, and our continuing demands for additional subsidies for higher income families, will be self-defeating if the result is to significantly expand the gulf between those who succeed and those who do not in our economy and our society.

As the consistent “Incomplete” for all states in the report card surely suggests, it is time to place a new emphasis on measuring the results of both individuals and institutions. And, they must be measured against rigorous, qualitative standards reflecting our global competition and the ever-changing needs of both our society and our economy.

We have much work to do together. Let us spend our efforts trying to meet our challenges rather than arguing about the validity of the judgments that this report contains.

E-Mail this link to a friend.
Enter your friend's e-mail address:

PREVIOUS STORY | BACK TO CROSSTALK | NEXT STORY

Top

National Center logo
© 2000 The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education

HOME | about us | center news | reports & papers | national crosstalk | search | links | contact

site managed by NETView Communications